"Yes...but [in those recent job cuts at major tech firms] who are they cutting? [They are] cutting redundancy and adding highly skilled workers [it's] is part of life."
Right, those laid off or made redundant lack those highly specialized skills. Those who are made redundant need different skill sets for the software-defined future that they simply don't have, right? Of course each position that needs to be filled is a special snowflake that in turn needs its own special snowflake to fill it and be able to unlock those miracles and incredible experiences that makes everyone involved super proud. Everyone is precious about these things.
And - to be absolutely clear - that is why these companies are great.
Ok, that said, are these companies getting too precious? Are we - you and I - getting too precious about those companies? Are there any negative externalities caused by so much preciousness?
And - to be absolutely clear - that is why these companies are great.
Ok, that said, are these companies getting too precious? Are we - you and I - getting too precious about those companies? Are there any negative externalities caused by so much preciousness?
I think the arguement can be made that we are subsidizing preciousness too damn much. If you had the option to increase the size of a bucket - one that is replenished year after year - that is not only full of the exact snowflakes you are looking floor, but is actually flown direct to you INSTEAD of having to fill your own bucket up with regular old water, then freeze that bucket into a workable mold before you husk off chunks that basically will get the job done and could be chisled out over time, who the fuck would ever choose the latter? This is what is happening. We are subsidizing precious companies and their desire to select their precious snowflakes.
The claim that there is an absolute lack of domestic STEM talent versus actual jobs and forecast jobs is not a tenable arguement to hold. The reality, as the US Bureau of Labor Studies made clear here (https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2015/article/stem-crisis-or-stem-surplus-yes-and-yes.htm) is much more nuanced and the reality is that it is frankly impossible to unequivocally assert such a lack exists. The amount of anecdotal evidence relied on - most of which is provided by the groups that would benefit the most by having a bucket of talent pooled exclusively for them - is astounding.
What the real focus regarding HIRING REFORM should be - because any visa reform would essentially be a reform on hiring practices - should be to monitor real wages amongst other factors of course; I'm not a PhD for faks sakes. Those sectors/positions that see a quicker rise/spike in real wages obviously would indicate an area where companies - especially smaller companies - may have a need for easier access to easily recruitable talent in order to compete. This would also benefit the larger ecosystem with a diversity of product solutions that would give consumers more choice and expedite future improvements.
And let's talk about global diversity and a global ecosystem of competing businesses. Let's say Trump pulled a knee jerk reaction and yanks the whole H1B program, hundreds of thousands of Indians and Eastern Europeans amongst others will have to go home. They will be pissed, and heartbroken and everything. They will leave behind friends and have to move back to countries with backward ways of doing things. But how much of that backwardness and corruption can be attributed to a comparative lack of competition for better leaders, better business people etc...?? These people would return with global networks, best practices, and a fucking chip on their shoulder bigger than the tumour that took out Steve Jobs...
